The streetscape renovation on River Street has opened to mixed
reviews. Most agree that this
project accomplished a much-needed renovation; however I have heard a number of
concerns:
·
Batavia spent far more of its TIF funds than planned,
which will hurt its ability to improve other targeted areas.
·
The remodeling resulted in a reduction of
parking in an area that already lacked adequate parking.
·
The parking is confusing: It is difficult to
identify where the parking actually is allowed and has resulted in vehicles
being ticketed or blocking through traffic.
·
Batavia City Council hired design consultants
without seeking proposals from qualified local professionals. This alienated local design firms who
have now missed an opportunity to contribute within their own community.
The city council
is about to approve a design for the crowning piece of the project: the decorative
entry arch. What began as a line
item budgeted at $55,000 was then increased to $90,000 in June, 2012. That cost has now risen to
approximately $120,000 when professional design fees and lighting are
included. Below is a rendering of
the proposed arch.
As an architect, I am
respectful of the efforts of other architects and designer professionals
I have tried to
remain open about this arch design.
I have reviewed the drawings and the 3D images several times.
To call this
structure an arch is not accurate. The design is more of a tiara, an intricate halo, 30-feet
in diameter, hovering14-feet above the street. It is supported from cables suspended from a heavy timber
structure.
I don’t think this design is
successful. The timber and steel design does not fit contextually with Batavia’s
historic surroundings, nor does it represent Batavia’s future. It is an
expensive, garish structure.
I think we can better spend $120,000
of Batavian’s tax dollars elsewhere.
Or not at all.
As a resident of Batavia, a couple things bother me about the proposed arch. One, the move to push the arch project through before the Council changes, set to take place in the election on Tuesday. One alderman was quoted as saying, “[if they don’t like it] the next City Council can tear it down.” Really? This issue that has renewed controversy over the River Street project should be a time to re-evaluate the next move, not rush into it. Also, a claim made by a current alderman that no comments were heard from anyone, other than the residents on the 15 person arch committee, speaks of an alderman who is not talking with his constituents. My choice for alderman in the 5th ward, Steve Vasilion, knows my opinion: it’s not necessary, nor very attractive. Let’s talk about other options. Thank you. Jan Hofmeister
ReplyDeleteThat's an example of some serious frivolous spending of people's tax dollars. If Batavia expects any renewed or continued trust in the city and what/how they develop projects, they need to do much more public scoping to see if there's a mutual interest, and allow people to suggest ideas (how else do you foster a community that values the project?) I think its great they want to build something for the sole purpose of being a attractive art piece, but personally I've seen Batavia residents build more attractive tree forts in their backyard with a budget of $1-2k.
ReplyDelete